Comparing the Dutch and American Democracies

[Syamsu]

Arjen seems to be a socialist, no way he accepts chouce is real.

Arjen, if you can convince him you're not a socialist (perhaps by pointing to some of your stuff about how the CCP controls everything) I think this could be the beginning of a beautiful friendship.

Uh what are you talking about, he suggested a 3rd political party based on BLM, which is a marxist organization.

[Arjen]

If he believed that Joe Biden, the EU, the MSM and the CCP denied the existence of choosing you might find some common ground (aside from geographically).

Syamsu The above mentioned do not only deny free choice, but freedom in general!

Also: In a democratic system, I can come off as a socialist, but democracy on top, please. Freedom 2nd and then some social rules to keep everyone from being exploited.

Arjen seems to be a socialist, no way he accepts chouce is real.

Echt wel!

What is you interest/background in philosophy, by the way?

[Arjen]

Just 3 topics to show you what I mean:
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=16919
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=16892&start=45
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=16891&start=15

[Steve3007]

he suggested a 3rd political party based on BLM, which is a marxist organization

He agrees with you that BLM is a Marxist organization (and that that is a bad thing). I've seen him say it. He thinks there's Marxists everywhere. I'm telling you, you'll get on like a house on fire.

[Arjen]

That's incredible! I thought I was alone in this!

[Syamsu]

Uh why would someone against Marxism, suggest a 3rd political party be created, based on blm / Marxism?

[Arjen]

Uh why would someone against Marxism, suggest a 3rd political party be created, based on blm / Marxism?

It was an example, nothing more. Plus, the democrat/republican thing is getting out of hand. A few extra parties would be a democratic solution. Given that health care and schooling are issues, I thougjt I'd give an example.

Anyway, some part socialism is also important. But, full fledged Marxism is a terror!

[Syamsu]

Uhuh socialism is important... So Steve said that you also accept freedom, decisions, are an actual reality. You accept decisions are an actual reality of physics, as in that someone has the alternative futures available to physicaly go left or right, and can make either of them the present?

And most importantly, how is the agency of a decision identified?

[Arjen]

Haha, I would say that given that we can wonder if we have free choice or not, it is proven that we have. Else, we would not wonder about this. However, most people are not using that free choice!

How to identify the agency of a decision is much more difficult. But, I think this lies in the abilities of evaluating and predicating. That means that the whole logical process is based on free choice. We perceive something and make it into a thought-object. The thought object already carries relations and qualities. Then depending on our postion to such a thing, we judge based on how evaluate it subjectively. So, being a subject and being able to form thought objects is already free choice.

Does that answer your question?

[Syamsu]

My answer, and ofcourse the correct answer, is that the agency of a choice can only be identified with a chosen opinion. To say a painting is beautiful, the opinion is formed by spontaneous expression of emotion with free will, and the opinion expresses a love for the way the painting looks.

The spiritual and subjective, chooses what material and objective comes to be.

Objects in the universe of mind, are just as well material and objective, as are objects in the universe. But emotions in the heart, are spiritual and subjective, there is no evidence of them whatsoever.

[Steve3007]

So, there you go Arjen. You're now reasonably up to speed with Syamsu's sole theme, about which he has posted exclusively on here for, I think, 8 years at last count. Enjoy.

[Arjen]

Pleased to meet you.

[Syamsu]

The creationist conceptual scheme:
1. Creator / chooses / spiritual / identity of which is a matter of chosen opinion
2. Creation / chosen / material / existence of which is a matter fact forced by evidence

Which means Creationism defines the concepts of opinion and fact, validating each in their own right, in separate categories.

Materialism does not validate the concept of opinion at all. Which is why in materialism, opinions are a subcategory of facts, facts about brainstates, and not categorically distinct.

The political application of materialism is socialism. Which means socialists assert their opinion about what is good and beautiful, as scientific facts. Like right wing national socialism, asserts content of character of people, whether someone is nice, as a matter of biological fact. Communism, also caled scientific socialism, likewise asserts that quality is factual.

Then after the holocaust, and in response to it, postmodernism was popularized, which asserts that opinions are inherent in statements of fact. This worked to soften the hard-edged emotionless materialist attitudes.

Currently academics is back in the rabbit hole of confusion over fact and opinion, just like it was prior to the holocaust. But with the benefit of teaching about the holocaust and postmodernism, which softens up the materialist attitudes significantly.

The catalyst for confusion of opinion and fact is natural selection theory. First because it throws out creationism, which properly distinguishes between fact and opinion, second because natural selection uses subjective terminology in an objectified way.

"as natural selection works solely by and for the good of each being, all corporeal and mental endowments will tend to progress towards perfection" C. Darwin, Origin Of Species

But really the main thing that confuses people about the difference between fact and opinion, is to fundamentally conceive of making a choice in terms of figuring out the best option. When choosing is so defined, then what is good and bad are asserted as facts, which facts are then used to evaluate the options with, in a choice. The subjective spirit is thrown out from the concept of choice.

The correct definition of choice is for the subjective spirit to make one of alternative futures the present, spontaneously. But psychological pressures drive people towards comprehending choice in terms of figuring out what is best. Then evolution theory works as a catalyst on this weakness, causing socialism.

The USA stil has many creationists, which is why it is still a free country. In Europe, we much rely on the history of the holocaust to keep from becoming full fledged socialists. Immorally, Europe relies on the memory of attrocities, to not commit an attrocity, thus neccessating attrocity in order to be moral.

[Sculptor1]

The creationist conceptual scheme:
1. Creator / chooses / spiritual / identity of which is a matter of chosen opinion
2. Creation / chosen / material / existence of which is a matter fact forced by evidence

OFF topic in a big way.
Why not start another thread?

[Syamsu]

I already made that topic years ago. And you are wrong, creationism is the defining difference between US and Netherlands politics.